To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.termsOpen lugnet.admin.terms in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / Terms of Use / 488
487  |  489
Subject: 
Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.terms
Date: 
Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:56:22 GMT
Viewed: 
8226 times
  
In lugnet.admin.terms, Keith Goldman wrote:
   This could be the beginning of the end for me...

“Making disparaging remarks about the personal integrity of others merely to make a point”

So I can’t call Soren Roberts the smelly village idiot, with all the integrity of a back-room pornographer?

Um, as I understand it the truth is always a defense against charges of libel. So you should be OK. Or are you saying he’s not actually those things? I get so confused. (1)

More seriously, and this is a real problem that I don’t know the real answer to, how do you tell the difference between harmless banter between friends and a real insult delivered with intent to hurt? If you know the people, it’s easy. But if you’re just walking in off the street, how do you tell? The way to tell is to ask. So if you (generic you) get asked to explain the joke offline, please take it in good graces, explain it and that will be that. But for the most part unless Soren (or whoever you’re trashing, all in good fun) complains, it won’t even come up.

I don’t want to see LUGNET become a cold sterile place devoid of all fun like the Iron Reich is reputed to be, but I know that things as they were of late weren’t working. I think you’ll have to trust our judgement to tell the difference between fun banter and hurtful talk. That’s not an easy thing to do is it? So if we get it wrong, cut us some slack. Or give us some smack. Whichever.

The alternative is to not have any guidelines at all and the moderators run rampant, playing favorites and so forth. (oooh... he said rampant!) That seems a bad plan, I’ve seen that, didn’t like it.

The guidelines you cited are from Suz’s post and have been around a long time. They are derived from the ToS itself which hasn’t changed, they were just an elaboration. The stuff Kelly cited is just an elaboration of the same framework. So it’s not that the rules have changed all of a sudden. It’s that we’ve been given some tools to address the “anarchy” that Bill referred to elsethread. I don’t think it was complete anarchy but he did have a point.

Does that help? I hope so but I dunno.

1 - I was KIDDING. everyone knows YOU’RE the village pornographer, not Soren. Or back room idiot.... now what was I saying? I get so confused.



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
 
This could be the beginning of the end for me... "Making disparaging remarks about the personal integrity of others merely to make a point" So I can't call Soren Roberts the smelly village idiot, with all the integrity of a back-room pornographer? (...) (20 years ago, 29-Dec-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)

48 Messages in This Thread:





















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR